Is this Phony Physics? A review of Doug Brignole's Claims and Models and Brig-20 Quad exercises

** Responses to Dougs defamation video below**
After appearing on Mark Bell's Power Project, we began to receive some question regarding controversial claims made by Doug Brignole. So we invested in Doug's full product to provide an informed review and opinion.
In this portion of the review, Kassem covers the mathematical problems with Doug's physics models and provides important context abut evaluating exercises on more than just a single point in a resistance curve.
Towards the end there is a chart scoring popular quad exercises like the hack squat, pendulum squat, heel elevated squat, barbell squat, quad dominant leg press, and Doug's Brig-20 quad exercises, the leg extension, cable sissy squat and cable squat.
Everyone probably knows by now that we are fans of the leg extension, especially the Prime Fitness leg extension. But you will have to watch the video to see Kassem's evaluation and ranking of the cable sissy squat and cable squat compared to the other quadricep exercises.
At the end of the day physics is a valuable metric that should be included in the thought process of exercise selection and programming choices. However if you are not doing the physics properly, you may end up making poor decisions.
Quick Response to Doug Brignole's clear defamation intent video:
In response to this video, Doug made a response video where he does admit the models are not accurate. However after that he proceeds to make false claims and use snapshots of this video out of context to try to discredit me personally.
First he says that I do not define the moment arm properly, and that it should be parallel to the resistance. A moment arm is perpendicular to the resistance as I have defined it. Doug is just wrong and/or lying. For reference from Oxford, here is a pasted definition and link.
The shortest perpendicular distance between a force's line of action and an axis of rotation (e.g. a pivot). In a lever, the moment arm of the force is often referred to as the force arm and that of the resistance is referred to as the resistance arm.
www.oxfordreference.com/view/...
Doug takes several slides our of context including my remark on where the shin pad sits on the tibia in a leg extension, as I referred to its about 75% the distance on average. This is common and by all means not unreasonable. If it were 85% it would not have changed the point I was making. The length would vary based on the person and machine a few percentage, and the point was it will be less than 100% which skews the model. The squat was being under measured and the leg extension over measured, and when combined, that change in magnitude which is where we have a different opinion on whats acceptably accurate, and how important this single factor will be in the exercise selection paradigm.
.
Doug falsely claims that I didn't properly draw a forearm angle right, and also that that I was trying to say an 18° forearm would have 3x the moment arm as a 10° forearm. First off, Doug references an image of the visual in the mid range position, which has a more vertical position than the bottom. The angle in the illustration is drawn over the bottom position forearm, and then a mid range position was overlayed over the top to demonstrate the elbow traveling forward. Not only is Doug using the image out of context to make a false statement, this would not be comparable in the first place (mid range to bottom position). So it's an irrational argument, based on a lie. The second part of this claim of 18 vs 10 degrees is also false as what I was stating in the video is that because Doug underestimated the moment arm of the 10° forearm position, that the person with different body structure wold have 3x the load magnitude compared to Doug's inaccurate model represents, which is why some people have very different experiences in the tricep effort than what Doug describes. The context here was referring to the argument Mike Israetel presented using anecdotes about the dip. An 18° angle is a little less than double the moment arm of a 10° angle in this case, and Doug underestimated the 10° moment arm by near half, which is why the comparison between an accurately calculated moment arm at 18 is about 3x what Doug's model represents. Doug then proceeds to use some scales to try to visualize his arguments, but he does not properly apply the changes in lever lengths and total mass in the examples, once again using inaccurate models.
Hopefully this video can help you make better decisions in your exercise selection and programming. If you want to learn more about our work, you can check out our member site our courses.
The N1 Membership Site has the most innovative Exercise Library, Articles, Videos, and Workout & Nutrition Programs
www.N1.Training
Shirts & Steel Shakers
www.N1.Training/Merch
Online Courses and Live Practical Events/Seminars
www.N1.education

[@N1education]

Nit Pick, on the dip example when I say the shifting the center of mass round, this is a mis-speak. The center of mass doesn't shift, the body shifts/moves to keep the moment arm for the elbow and maintain the center of mass. Not my first time I mis-spoke, wont be my last. It can also be hard to see the bottom position in the video because of the opacity to make sure you listen. In Doug's rebuttal video he tries to say the forearm angle is misleading, but he is erroneously comparing the mid range image, which anyone would know is not comparable. You can take whatever motivation you want from that false representation. . Response to false defamatory statements from Doug are in the video description as well: In Doug Brignole's response video he says I have the definition of moment arm incorrect and it should be parallel. For reference: Moment arm Definition from Oxford: The shortest perpendicular distance between a force's line of action and an axis of rotation (e.g. a pivot). In a lever, the moment arm of the force is often referred to as the force arm and that of the resistance is referred to as the resistance arm. www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803100204982?rskey=DydNcu&result=9. . Here’s also a response to some of the purest who accept this video is for a uneducated audience. In certain context, I said joint instead instead of axis and load instead of force, because the goal is to make the information understandable to those that need it. People with a deep understanding of physics, don’t need this video. Considering I stayed in the context of the simplified and inaccurate models, this was the easiest way to communicate the inaccuracy of the models. This is not a video of me teaching physics. Stop trying to overcomplicate things outside of the context they were presented, for the sake of these models, joint and axis are close enough to be communicated as such.

[@faithnfitnessguykk9569]

Thanks for this video. I have Doug's book and I do many of the exercises he lists. Your layout adds to my thinking process. Since you are close to Prime, maybe you could ask them to make a pendulum squat to rule them all :) BTW I have their RO-t8 handles and love them. Got them after watching a video of you demonstrating them.

[@N1education]

I just collaborated with predator strength on theirs. It’s amazing. Unfortunately shipping to the USA is difficult for everyone right now.

[@connorstjean]

Thank for you for taking the time to make this breakdown!

[@N1education]

👊👊👊

[@rickythepatriot5395]

Is there anyway you could create a similar excersise chart for all the major muscle groups?

[@N1education]

Is there a way, yes, but these charts are always contextually limited, so I’m hesitant to display these things as they can be open to misinterpretation or people being too rigid in their exercise selection. It’s something to think about and when it comes to some groups the number of exercises is huge.

[@juansamudio1171]

What do you think about his lat exercise of pulling the arm away from the spine laterally instead of forward?

[@N1education]

Makes no sense outside of a coloring book. It’s exactly what you’d want to do to bias the upper back and rear delts over the lats. All the published research as well as our own supports the lats being more biased with saggiital plane shoulder extension,

[@crislferreira]

Hello Kassem, how are you? Just to clarify, cause I'm a bit confused. Isn't the moment arm the perpendicular distance between the joint and the resistance? Meaning in the squat, it's not the distance between the red line you have on the image (the center of mass) and the knee, but the distance between a parallel line to that one but that goes through the barbell (the gravity of the weight). Is this wrong?

[@N1education]

The center of mass includes both bodyweight and bar weight, so all resistance. The heavier the bar is in relationship to the body eight, the closer the bar will be to the center of mass, but you can’t pretend the body is weightless and just calculate your the bar.

[@kaeylib]

Awesome video 😁😊 for that technical fifth quad muscle, would that be the sartorius?

[@N1education]

tensor vastus intermedius TVI

[@tomburke3681]

I have studied and applied some of Dougs teachings.He is spot on with most of his content. What i like about his method of teaching is that he simplifies human biomechanics

[@oldmanmuscle]

Regarding 8X Mr. O. Ronnie Coleman and spinal loading, how do we explain that is spine has been destroyed by the time he is in his 50s? His 800 pound squat and heavy squatting for years had to be affected by spinal loading. What are your thoughts on this champion's severe problems? steve

[@marketlider2811]

He had an injury and instead of recovering he decided to Just ignore It. He kept training while injured and that's what Destroyed his back

[@oldmanmuscle]

@@marketlider2811 I think that for lots of bodybuilders, ego is so strong as to overrule the ability to make wise choices for our body and health. Sad indeed. steve

[@ssdabel]

this was amazingly informative and thorough, congrats!!🙏🙏

[@mrdisco8616]

You could have Kassem on your podcast maybe?

[@FitchFitchFitch]

@@mrdisco8616 100%!!

[@ssdabel]

@@mrdisco8616 surprise incomin...:)

[@VEGASENTER]

@@ssdabel finally!

[@JakubKowalski93]

I think I watched it first. I also know it doesn't matter. Thanks for this because this is what I've been waiting for.

[@nicolasklug2311]

Great video and actually enjoy these the most !

[@billbergmann7840]

dips are great but would you say a machine is better than doing weighted dips (safer and better more muscle growth) ?

[@N1education]

a machine makes it easier for you to control the body orientation to bias more pecs or more elbow extension. The con of the machines are getting in and out and stabilizing when using loads near to exceeding of bodyweight. But they can be a great option if used properly.

[@timmons2003]

Why is the line of force in the squat example drawn behind the barbell? Shouldn’t the line of force be straight down from the barbell?

[@N1education]

No, it’s down from center mass, (or up from mid door) which includes bodyweight. The more relative bar weight, the closer center mass will be to under the bar. Drawing it from the bar is a common mistake people make that done actually understand the physics 😉😉.

[@timmons2003]

Thanks for the quick response. One thing I was thinking about here that has me curious and trying to understand this explanation is that every biomechanics example of an exercises line of force is always drawn through the resistance. As an example, a bicep curl doesn’t show a line through the center of mass of your arm or body, but rather through the Dumbbell which is exerting the downward force, in addition to gravity of course, on the lever. The same goes for a lateral raise, leg curl, etc. So is there something unique about the barbell squat where the line of force is always over your center of gravity regardless of where the lid is or are all the other biomechanics examples showing line of force through the resistance incorrect as well and they should be drawn through the center of mass?

[@dennis85573]

What are your 20 best exercises?

[@N1education]

That’s not a list I would make as this is making far to many assumptions on the individual and the goal. Instead we Tach principles of how to evaluate how well an exercise works for a goal. However if I did, such a thing only 2-3 would be very similar to Doug’s when you account for the execution/technique. Leg extension being one of them.

[@nobodysfitness2852]

This is the kind of video I've been waiting for! An actual mechanical breakdown of Doug's methods as opposed to just anecdotes. While his models are flawed I still think the exercises themselves are a good addition to a more othrodox routine, no need to be fanatical about it like some people... Cable squat is the exercise I've had a lot of issues with while trying it out... Now I know why! haha I'll be waiting eagerly for the biomechanics breakdown video!

[@N1education]

make sure to come back for the biomechanics portion.

[@billbergmann7840]

@@N1education dips are great but would you say a machine is better than doing weighted dips (safer and better more muscle growth) ? Do you think that for training chest you have to bring your arms to the middle of your body for max. muscle growth as doug says?

[@malcolmjelani3588]

Ok, so I've been using Doug's methods for well over a year now. So far so good. No injuries, which is extremely important to me.

[@N1education]

Doug & Moe, have avoided discussion of any of the topics in this video, while trying to make it personal and making rebuttal videos where they lie about whats being said and demonstrated here. Since Doug has made a tremendous effort to try and misrepresent what I have said, here is an objective chart on the accuracy of their model based purely on the math Doug uses to estimate the loading. The formulas are there and there is a link for you to check the numbers as well. Keep in mind that the errors below are compounded when you add in the other nuances I discussed in this video, but this should give a very clear picture of the how objectively wrong the physics models are. Column 1 - Limb Angle (Degrees) Column 2 - Correct % of *Moment Arm in the context of Dougs Model - =sin(#°) Column 3 - Doug's Math - =Angle/90 Column 4 - How far off Doug's method of using the tibia or forearm angle is 0 0.00% 0.0% 0.0% Vertical 5 8.72% 5.6% -56.9% 10 17.36% 11.1% -56.3% Doug's Dip Example 15 25.88% 16.7% -55.3% 18 30.90% 20.0% -54.5% Kassem's Dip Example 20 34.20% 22.2% -53.9% 25 42.26% 27.8% -52.1% 30 50.00% 33.3% -50.0% Doug's Squat Example 1 where Doug says it's 30-33% at 30° depending on video/book 35 57.36% 38.9% -47.5% 40 64.28% 44.4% -44.6% 45 70.71% 50.0% -41.4% Doug's Squat Example 2 where Doug says 45° is 50% depending on video/book 50 76.60% 55.6% -37.9% Heel Elevated Squat 55 81.92% 61.1% -34.0% 60 86.60% 66.7% -29.9% 65 90.63% 72.2% -25.5% 70 93.97% 77.8% -20.8% 75 96.59% 83.3% -15.9% 80 98.48% 88.9% -10.8% 85 99.62% 94.4% -5.5% 90 100.00% 100.0% 0.0% Horizontal www.rapidtables.com/calc/math/Sin_Calculator.html

[@philiptoppin7514]

What about if a belt is use to attach the cable. The belt would be around the waist .

[@aaronbradshaw7256]

I stumbled upon the Brig-20 earlier this year and it's the first time in almost 20 years I've been able to train consistently. I had always been a Big-3, get injured/layoff type of trainer. I've been sticking to the B-20 exercises for many months because I'm still getting a lot of benefit from them. That said, I know that there are other exercises I could benefit from and I understand the limitations of models. I've also never gotten along with the cable squat variations and your analysis helps me understand why. But through Doug's work I've stumbled upon yourself and Paul Carter and I'll be including both of your recommendations as my training evolves.

[@N1education]

There is a whole world that exist between the big 3 and the brig 20. That’s awesome that you found something that worked better for you. Now just keep progressing towards better and better to infinity and beyond. 👍

[@N1education]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJublHamnJdjatU

[@samozeleznaterapia3643]

Finally!!! Awesome breakdown!

[@N1education]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJublHamnJdjatU

[@asdfkjhlk34]

Measuring knee angle from side view for a squat is also problematic unless the lifters knees are traveling straight forward and back and is standing with a hip width stance. The larger the hip abduction angle, the shorter the moment arms appear from side view

[@outerspacing9207]

At About 45 minutes you talk about how back position does not influence the load (on the quads?). You mentioned weight in front of the person (front squats?) Still loading the back. If a person's back was in theory completely vertical or completely horizontal while squatting, that does not effect the load on the quads any more or less?

[@N1education]

The body shifts as you move the bar position, so unless the knees go further forward, the loading does not change. So whether bar position change a loading depends on the person as for some people this changes their motion to move the knees forward more, but in others it actually loads their hips more because they were already maxed out in dorsiflexion.

[@user-xr6rw2bz3r]

It would be interesting to see an EMG analysis of Doug's exercises versus conventional exercises, especially the cable squat versus regular squat (with equal intensity). I would also like to point out something. If there is no difference in the external torque on the knee joint when squatting with a cable compared to a regular squat, then logically a person can use the same weight during squatting with a cable. I can only say from experience that I can’t even come close to using the same weight when squatting with a cable (could this mean that we have a larger external moment arm on the knee joint during the cable squat? ... the question remains open ...)

[@N1education]

this is the problem with over simplifying these things, and then over stating the importance of those same things. The whole idea of basing exercise selection on ratio of loading to torque has very limited application unless you get to an extreme level of "in efficiency". For example doing and RDL for quads. Leverage isn't the only factor in the cable squat either. A cable squat because of the balance factor will have limited loading potential based on body weight, also limited ROM, and increased stability challenges. The reason for going through the moment arms in this video was simply to show that the information being stated in these models is not accurate. Doug also doesn't believe in EMG data, or applied research in general from how I see it. The reciprocal inhibition thing for example.

[@FrankDrebinist]

Thank you so much!

[@BruceWayne-rb1mb]

Doug and Moe usually critique individuals who have critiqued them. So would be interesting to see if they do one on this video. Great insight and continuing support to your content, information, and platform.

[@N1education]

I’ve seen tons of videos of them just smashing exercises from tik tok

[@N1education]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJublHamnJdjatU

[@BruceWayne-rb1mb]

@@N1education tuning in Kassem

[@MrMizzo13]

Coach Kassem is UNDEFEATED.

[@N1education]

IDK, I have proved myself wrong a lot lol.

[@horsiemetaldetecting5975]

@@N1education And thats a very good thing. Why do certain people in the industry not even make the slightest adjustments in their training after you clearly explained them things. Because that would mean admitting they were wrong and their ego cant have that. And apparently not even a phd helps you to value truth more than ego

[@jimkofoid5054]

Nice job… very thorough and respectful. Perhaps you could invite Doug to discuss your numbers in a calm, educational manner. Also, I’ve followed Doug’s program for a year and, I’m sure you’ll agree, there is more to the workouts than mere numbers, such as bilateral deficit, neurological factors, and direct muscle loading. At any rate, nice job.

[@gabrielemazzoli]

Love this

[@outerspacing9207]

I really like Doug's book and I am using his ideas and "best excersises" with what I believe to be good success. Only been at it a couple months so hard to say results yet. But I am enjoying doing them. While I don't think it will start a shit storm. Probabaly some back and forth could happen. Which I actually think is good and maybe I can learn from. In the end I think us average folk will just end up believing whoever we "like" more lol. Without actually knowing who is more objectionably correct. Still I enjoyed both what you and he has to say.

[@N1education]

If you’re enjoying what your doing and the rate of progress, as long as it’s not something that will hurt you in the long run, which I don’t believe Doug’s exercises are harmful, then you can just enjoy the journey. For people that want to pursue faster/greater results or more optimal training, then I think progressing to better thinking and exercises will be important, for sure at some point. Keep in mind anything that’s an improvement over what you were doing can seem good, but that doesn’t mean best possible. To each their own in terms of the investment into their fitness journey.

[@outerspacing9207]

@@N1education alright thanks

[@N1education]

@@outerspacing9207 kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJublHamnJdjatU

[@joshuaford4576]

If only Kassem had a platform to teach proper biomechanics and science based approaches to training and nutrition..... OH WAIT! N1 Education is just such a platform... don't sleep on it.

[@wyatthuggins3292]

Hey well done. Excellent presentation. Could you look into making a video on “thekneesovertoesguy”-Ben Patrick. He’s got a few radical claims that I think you might find some errors in.

[@N1education]

This is the first request we have gotten on Mr Patrick. Please let me know what specific things you have questions on. If enough people have overlapping questions, I will cover it.

[@bryanutility9609]

Is the biomechanics one ready?

[@N1education]

Filming Next week. We have had back to back events since thanksgiving weekend. Feel free to leave any specific questions

[@N1education]

Delayed to address this kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJublHamnJdjatU

[@asdfkjhlk34]

Great video I learned a lot of physics

[@ReversingTheSpell]

Great video! I'm looking forward to the other ones on biomechanics and anatomy because he makes numerous errors on those matters as well. Some examples include his erroneous belief that you can't bias the long head of the triceps and his poor understanding of lat anatomy.

[@ReversingTheSpell]

@@octavianandron9418 You are a bonehead, you can't even construct coherent sentences. No, all three heads of the triceps are not "attached by a joint", they converge into a single tendon that inserts onto the ulna. Yes they are all active in elbow extension but that doesn't mean different heads can't be biased based on which compartment/fibers of the muscle have the best line of pull and mechanical/positional advantage over the direction of resistance. EMG studies also show this with regards to differential activation levels in relation to different elbow/shoulder positions in the three heads. It's rather imprudent of you to make bold claims about things you know very little about.

[@johannesskyborn4224]

Thank you for this. I read Dougs book tried his exercises out and stopped barbell squats and hacks.. i went back to squating after like a month or two ..still thinking they are inferior, and I choose to do them because i enjoy them more.. Now my mind is at ease lol

[@jorgeanderson9032]

Same i still do them on occasion just for fun

[@peerreviewed8509]

Hacks are so much better than all the Rigged-20 exercises, exception leg extension, which is basically the perfect compliment.

[@dragorn3212]

As a physics person myself neither of you are remotely right, its not as simple as taking the sine and cosine angles etc. Nice try though

[@N1education]

"insert green goblin meme" - of course it's not that simple. As a "physics" person. You should be well aware of the importance of context.

[@johnscott3893]

Re: Dips: The illustration/photo Doug provides is very pec biassed. Suspect a more triceps dominant movement, that is elbows tight in, head back and back arched would create an even larger angle than the picture used would suggest.

[@N1education]

It was just used to show that the claims and calculations were not accurate. Nothing further.

[@GVS]

Great breakdown, well done!

[@N1education]

Much appreciated!

[@ComeOnPeopleThink]

now you can see where you failed

[@GVS]

@@ComeOnPeopleThink fanboi alert!

[@ComeOnPeopleThink]

@@GVS no need to alert me I seen you there...now did you see where you fell short..

[@jahedazizi5015]

although i understand the general idea of doug's insistance on using exercises with less risk to reward ratio, but as an engineer who knows torque, levers and trigonometry i can confirm the math used in doug's claims is not accurate. thanks coach Kas for pointing it out and a reminder that the loading magnification of 45 degree shin angle is 0.707 not 0.75 😉

[@Kushgroove234]

I did find it annoying when the guy giving the presentation said "it's about 75%, I'm to lazy to do the math" when all it take is pressing Sin45 on a fucking calculator... Arguing Doug's approximations with his own approximations, while more accurate and truthful, doesn't help sell his authority on the matter when it's such a basic concept

[@xuyu614]

I’m so glad to get this debriefing. I bought Brignole’s book and have tried to apply his principles, to mixed results. His claims conflict with other KZbinrs, which has always been my challenge to resolve. You have definitely resolved some. I hope you cover his assertion that there are no muscles above collar bone to make the incline bench press effective. Then what muscles are moving the weight? If it’s only the front delts, then why do so many KZbinrs love that exercise for pecs? John Meadows (may he Rest In Peace) said in one vid, “we’re gonna go it anyway cuz it brings the arms together” (I guess like doing flyes). I just decided to lower the incline to take out a bit of the front delts. And Brignole says no overhead pressing, contrary to the standard practice. So, does it not stimulate the side delts in their shortened position? I finally resolved to just overhead press despite his warnings cuz I finally decided it’s his opinion. Plus, he says that overhead presses only hit 40 percent of the side delts. I have shoulder issues from time to time, and also have very healthy shoulders. I have never had any impingement issues (which is mostly what he talks about as the reason never to press overhead). Some people are genetically inclined never to have impingement issues, and obviously I’m one of them. His warning not to do overhead presses seems opinionated (and doesn’t pass muster with any of my gym buddies). Then there’s his assertion that muscles only pull in a straight line to their origins. That lead to his funky middle traps exercise of rowing from far away. I finally gave up on it cuz it does not protract and retract my scapula any better than a regular row. I appreciate that you aptly discussed on another KZbin channel that Brignole does not apply different treatment to to the three triceps head, causing more conflict with other KZbinrs.

[@Keranu]

I feel the same as you.

[@N1education]

Will cover that a bit when we do a Biomechanics video. The nest video, a response to Doug's is here in the mean time kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJublHamnJdjatU

[@Keranu]

@@N1education oh cool you responded to Doug's latest tirade against you. Absolutely insane he accuses you of having an agenda of spewing misinformation to put him out of business. I like a lot of Doug's ideas but I lost respect for him when him and his associate responded like children to Geoffery Verity Schofield.

[@vorrr9]

Finally someone that actually refutes Doug's ideas using math and logic. I really like Doug's thinking, and he's caused me to reconsider the way I train, but it does irk me that his math is usually so off. Drawing inspiration from both Doug and Ben Patrick I arrived at the following lower body routine: 20 degree slantboard barbell squats (allows me to get my tibia to 30 degrees from horizontal - 86% efficiency), bumper plate 45 degree back extensions bodyweight nordic curls 45 degree calf raises

[@N1education]

Heel elevated squats are great! I prefer individual wedges that can match the foot better, but a solid exercise.

[@vorrr9]

what brand/style of wedge do you like?

[@N1education]

@@vorrr9 prime fitness solo wedges

[@N1education]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJublHamnJdjatU

[@27yearcoach]

Hat's off to you. You've got some balls to get into this pissing match with Doug Brignole. Good luck, the guys got an army of expertise giving him input on his stuff.

[@N1education]

It's just debate on our end, and I'm pretty confident in our math, biomechanics etc. I know Doug has a ton of cult followers, and thats exactly who the video was made more. If it helps great, if not, no problem.

[@27yearcoach]

@@N1education I train using his principles and at 66 have better musculature than at any point in my life. I don't do math. I can say the beauty of Doug's stuff is in the concept of using the best exercise that targets the muscle you're working. For me, that approach has worked. Less time spent and fewer injuries. I don't question your quad debate with him since I'm too ignorant of the concept being discussed you both seem to make good points. Btw your site looks impressive.

[@N1education]

@@27yearcoach glad you have found something that's working for you

[@N1education]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/eJublHamnJdjatU

[@musclemedicine_M.D]

Point: Academic discussion of the wheel is fine, trying to reinvent the wheel, not going to work!

[@happywafelky]

#joelseedman :D:D:D:D:D:D:D

[@itamar12258]

30° is 30% from 90° 45° is 50% from 90° 10° is about 11% from 90°

[@itamar12258]

Plus, the fact that you moved with more range doesn't mean that you moved in the most loaded range... So in the circle example yes, you maybe do move more inches in the frist 30° then the amount of inches you move in the last 30° but! It doesn't mean you get more load. Its all about the percentage of load out of 100%.

[@N1education]

ah ah ah... 30° is 33% of 90°

[@N1education]

@@itamar12258 the "inches" you are referring to are what is directly correlated to the load. If you need to watch the video a second time with a more open mind.

[@itamar12258]

@@N1education @N1 Education And Training Founded by Kassem Hanson ok yeah i meant "about 30% and if you really want we can say 33.333.... And just for the record, doug does write this in his book. For the second thing, the deal is that 30%, 10% or 100% is all about the percent off the available load. So if the joint that is under load did only move 30° of from the apex point then it does get only 33.3% of the total load. So if you squat 300 pounds and you move the tibia 30° the quad muscle will get 33.3% of that 300 lbs. Now we can say that someone has more then 30° or that if you stand on a wadge you will get more then that.. But this doesn't dismiss anything that Doug's says. Now for a few thigs that you said 1- that the quad moves the femur... What? All quad heads attache to the tibia so... The quad can only move the tibia (but maybe im wrong) 2- that you get more rom in the squat or the heck squat then in the sissy squat... Umm no, it only depends on how much does the tibia moves in relation to the line of force and how much active lever do you get. Although you might get dipper in the heck squat the tibia doesn't get even close to 100% active (but i does get more active then the barbell squat). On the other hand in cable sissy squat you get 100% active lever and you can get very dip (depending on how you preform the exercise exactly like you can get only to 90° knee flexion in the heck) and you also get some load in the top position because of the cable. 3- the circle mathematics... 30° is always 33% of the maximum available active lever. The degree from 100% active lever That is the only thing that changes how much load is on the muscle. I doubt you read his book from cover to cover because he explains all of this in there and its not that im a "fan boy" im your follower for years now and also i have some disagreements with some things doug said, it just seem to me that you are trying very hard to play the semantics game and make problems where there's non instead of focusing on the main idea that Doug brings.

[@N1education]

@@itamar12258 is his 11% example the resistance estimate is 100% less than actual, in the 33.33333% example it’s off by about 50% and in the 50% estimate it’s off by about 42%. If he was off by ~10% I would say that’s fair for demonstrating the principles. I read the book, watched the videos, and the podcast, so I am trying to be as consistent as possible, but if you have consumed the content you know there is variation in the delivery. I used the phrasing and numbers that were in the models that are freely available and I spoke to the principles generally. What I hear you saying is that you’re still thinking in the %lever mindset which just isn’t accurate. 30 deg is not equal 33% of an active lever, it’s about 50%. So to reiterate the video, the models are directionally correct but way off in magnitude which brings in to question how important that single factor is in exercise selection compared to others.